2015年8月5日 星期三

美國專利法第282條

筆記

美國專利法第282條（35 U.S.C. 282, PRESUMPTION OF VALIDITY; DEFENSES）擔負專利有效推論、侵權防守以及專利無效對抗等的功能。

其他文章參考：

35 U.S.C. 282經AIA改革後，刪除化學類專利的規範，也就是原本規定若化學成份被認為顯而易見而專利權無效，也就不用考慮其方法流程是否有效的問題。另加入專利無效的規範：排除best mode作為112無效的條件；若專利不符35 U.S.C. 251再領證規定，也會被認定專利權無效。

就目前35 U.S.C. 282規定，可以作為侵權訴訟的專利有效推定主張。
(a)其開宗明義就認為專利權應"逐項"推測有效，即便獨立項被認定無效，附屬項仍應推定有效。如果有無效主張，提出無效主張的該方擔負舉證責任。
(b)對於被告防守方，可主張無侵權、專利因無新穎性或為顯而易見而無效；可主張專利不符專利法第112條而無效，但排除best mode（最佳模式揭露）要求；可主張專利不符再領證規定；不排除其他可以在訴訟防守的事實。
(c)以上涉及專利無效與無侵權理由應於進入訴訟審理前至少30日以前提出，相關人事時地物應以訴狀提出；如果沒有及時提出，將不會被審理，除非法院提出要求。

如果專利權人提出，或官方提出的材料有誤，無法在侵權訴訟中主張專利期限延長（156）、調整（154(b)）。

其中提到證據對於一些人事時地物等事實的要求時，排除「聯邦索賠法院（United States Court of Federal Claims）」適用。

[原文]
劃線版（僅(a)(b)段摘錄）：
(a) IN GENERAL.--A patent shall be presumed valid. Each claim of a patent (whether in independent, dependent, or multiple dependent form) shall be presumed valid independently of the validity of other claims; dependent or multiple dependent claims shall be presumed valid even though dependent upon an invalid claim. Notwithstanding the preceding sentence, if a claim to a composition of matter is held invalid and that claim was the basis of a determination of nonobviousness under section 103(b)(1), the process shall no longer be considered nonobvious solely on the basis of section 103(b)(1). The burden of establishing invalidity of a patent or any claim thereof shall rest on the party asserting such invalidity.
(b) DEFENSES.--The following shall be defenses in any action involving the validity or infringement of a patent and shall be pleaded:
(1) Noninfringement, absence of liability for infringement, or unenforceability,unenforceability.
(2) Invalidity of the patent or any claim in suit on any ground specified in part II of this title as a condition for patentability,patentability.
(3) Invalidity of the patent or any claim in suit for failure to comply with--
(A) any requirement of section 112, except that the failure to disclose the best mode shall not be a basis on which any claim of a patent may be canceled or held invalid or otherwise unenforceable; or
(B) any requirement of section 251.
(3) Invalidity of the patent or any claim in suit for failure to comply with any requirement of sections 112 or 251 of this title,
(4) Any other fact or act made a defense by this title.

乾淨版：
35 U.S.C. 282 PRESUMPTION OF VALIDITY; DEFENSES.
(a) IN GENERAL.--A patent shall be presumed valid. Each claim of a patent (whether in independent, dependent, or multiple dependent form) shall be presumed valid independently of the validity of other claims; dependent or multiple dependent claims shall be presumed valid even though dependent upon an invalid claim. The burden of establishing invalidity of a patent or any claim thereof shall rest on the party asserting such invalidity.
(b) DEFENSES.--The following shall be defenses in any action involving the validity or infringement of a patent and shall be pleaded:
(1) Noninfringement, absence of liability for infringement, or unenforceability.
(2) Invalidity of the patent or any claim in suit on any ground specified in part II as a condition for patentability.
(3) Invalidity of the patent or any claim in suit for failure to comply with--
(A) any requirement of section 112, except that the failure to disclose the best mode shall not be a basis on which any claim of a patent may be canceled or held invalid or otherwise unenforceable; or
(B) any requirement of section 251.
(4) Any other fact or act made a defense by this title.
(c) NOTICE OF ACTIONS; ACTIONS DURING EXTENSION OF PATENT TERM.--In an action involving the validity or infringement of a patent the party asserting invalidity or noninfringement shall give notice in the pleadings or otherwise in writing to the adverse party at least thirty days before the trial, of the country, number, date, and name of the patentee of any patent, the title, date, and page numbers of any publication to be relied upon as anticipation of the patent in suit or, except in actions in the United States Court of Federal Claims, as showing the state of the art, and the name and address of any person who may be relied upon as the prior inventor or as having prior knowledge of or as having previously used or offered for sale the invention of the patent in suit. In the absence of such notice proof of the said matters may not be made at the trial except on such terms as the court requires.
Invalidity of the extension of a patent term or any portion thereof under section 154(b) or 156 because of the material failure-
(1) by the applicant for the extension, or
(2) by the Director, to comply with the requirements of such section shall be a defense in any action involving the infringement of a patent during the period of the extension of its term and shall be pleaded. A due diligence determination under section 156(d)(2) is not subject to review in such an action.
資料參考：www.bitlaw.com
Ron
張貼者：
標籤： , , , ,

沒有留言:

張貼留言

訂閱： 張貼留言 (Atom)